ProCoach

It IS simple. I know it when I see it!

Seriously.

You keep bringing up SBRS, but SBRS has professionals with radios ALL around the circuit to call this stuff in. No other series does that. I've been on the instructor roster since 2008, and they are the best.

Sean F

It's not simple. Passes don't get done and cars do get hit. If it were simple, people wouldn't be scratching their heads about what a "rub out" is, how it is defined and how it is different from a 13. For many of us who have done this for a while we look at a video like the one Scott posted where he gets nailed in the *** at the bustop and scratch our heads about it being a "rub out" and not a 13.

hf1

Of course it's simple, but it also needs to be:

- consistent (non-contradictory),
- posted for all to see,
- understood by all, and,
- consistently enforced

...in order to be effective.

hf1

I agree 100%. I appreciate threads like these that make me learn a lot about the differences between race series. IMO, clear, non-contradictory rules and their consistent enforcement are essential for a fun, educational, and safe race environment. From what I've read so far, it seems PCA CR has some room for improvement.

hf1

The first video was definitely not blocking. Should not have been black-flagged.

The second one had a couple of possible (but not egregious) blocks -- rear camera had bad visibility. But if the "100% at turn-in" rule applied (which I don't think it should) then they were not blocks as the inside car didn't establish much overlap at turn in (much less 100%) so it should have been legal for the video car to claim "his" corner and chop him off.

I think the PCA CR rules as they stand are contradictory and this causes a lot of confusion.

Gary R.

Apparently a body shop will rub out the dent and paint, then rub out the decals with new ones...

ProCoach

First off, this is an example where the facts shown in the video get derailed by a passionate and motivated competitor (you) in the quest to further the cause.

Look at the video again. It was side to side contact (not defending it, I see it as the overtaking driver's fault), NOT "hit in the ***," otherwise the Stewards could have ruled more definitively.

You have good motivation and good momentum on this issue (no matter what happens), don't ruin it by overzealous, inaccurate recountings of an event we can all judge for ourselves.

As far as your observation that it is not simple, it is a FACT that those less experienced, less well schooled, even less ethically driven, combined with the organization's expectations not clearly being delivered TO THE PEOPLE THAT NEED TO HEAR IT results in continuing incidents.

The fact is that I could run side-by-side through multiple corners with MANY, MANY PCA CR competitors, but there exists a mechanism for excising those that don't "get it."

^^THIS^^

Agreed.

Gary R.

There, fixed it for you Sean...

Astroman

OK here is my attempt at a contribution to this topic:

There will probably eventually be a rule that mandates video cameras in all cars.
The good news is we will have video of all on-track incidents.
The bad news is we will have video of all on-track incidents.
Videos of these incidents inevitably get posted on these forums.
These videos inevitably cause disagreement and debate.
We are all told (if anything) that we "don't have all the facts" (which is true because we usually only have one side of the story).
My question(s): Why aren't we allowed to "get all the facts"?
Why isn't the 13/13 process more transparent?
Why is it so secretive?
IMHO, if the "facts" of these incidents were made public, there would be a lot less controversy.

And BTW, yes I submitted this very question as a Rules Change Proposal this year.

gums

I think the reason they don't publish or discuss who has been 13'd is that they feel we will use that information in race tactics, knowing whether someone is on probation.

FrankyV

I think those that are willing to air their dirty laundry in a public forum are in the minority and PCA is generally tight-lipped about incidents out of respect for racer privacy. In addition, I would think that more transparency would also lead to more second guessing in the public forums, usually not much good comes of that. Racers themselves that want to expose their own or other racer's bad judgment, which face it, we all have been guilty of, well they can do that right here. Does anybody know if the other racing organizations like NASA, SCCA, POC, or VRG are more transparent with respect to disciplinary actions?

Van

One could just attend the rookie orientation meeting, and look around...

hf1

Excellent questions. I think the problem, again, stems from the vague, contradicting rules. This gives arbitrators (stewards) too much discretion (power) in their decisions which they simply are unable to consistently defend, hence the vail of secrecy. When rules are vague, everyone is a potential criminal and it's up to the judges (arbitrators) to apportion justice by the "Because I said so!" formula.

I don't mean to sound dramatic, but history has repeatedly shown that it is the quality (simplicity, consistency, etc.) and the enforcement of rules which determines the fate (flourish or death) of an organization.

Van

As a 944 drover, sometimes a car just *being* near me robs momentum...

FrankyV

I like the high level of discretion that the stewards have in the current system and will continue to make sure that they have a big plate of homemade cookies at every event I attend.